Satellite data proves Earth has not been warming the past 18 years - it's stable

[Doer]

Pad

Check your logic

If there was this window of opportunity it is to usher in and not protect you humans from the next Ice Age

And if you have your way it will just prove how very cold and insensitive the liberals really are

 

[Padawanbater2]

It'll bounce back and there's plenty of time for research

You base this solely on information coming straight out of your ass

 

[Padawanbater2]

Pad

Check your logic

If there was this window of opportunity it is to usher in and not protect you humans from the next Ice Age

And if you have your way it will just prove how very cold and insensitive the liberals really are

Your theory that more carbon dioxide introduced into the atmosphere is a good thing because the increases in temperature will save people from "the coming ice age" is idiotic beyond reason

Why do you think virtually all scientists in the world wouldn't reach that same conclusion? Do you people ever ask yourselves these questions?

 

[ginwilly]

You base this solely on information coming straight out of your ass

In your expert opinion what happens if we maintain status quo for 28 more months? 5 years?

What's the cutoff date until we are uninhabitable ?

 

[NLXSK1]

Your theory that more carbon dioxide introduced into the atmosphere is a good thing because the increases in temperature will save people from "the coming ice age" is idiotic beyond reason

Why do you think virtually all scientists in the world wouldn't reach that same conclusion? Do you people ever ask yourselves these questions?

Your premise is flawed. Most scientists do not agree on anything worth noting in the global warming debate. Your unyielding grip on a 97% created from a biased opinion study notwithstanding.

If your premise is flawed, how can your conclusion be correct?

 

[NLXSK1]

In your expert opinion what happens if we maintain status quo for 28 more months? 5 years?

What's the cutoff date until we are uninhabitable ?

Just shortly after we are completely broke

 

[Padawanbater2]

In your expert opinion what happens if we maintain status quo for 28 more months? 5 years?

What's the cutoff date until we are uninhabitable ?

Go read the IPCC's 5th report and see for yourself

Your premise is flawed. Most scientists do not agree on anything worth noting in the global warming debate. Your unyielding grip on a 97% created from a biased opinion study notwithstanding.

If your premise is flawed, how can your conclusion be correct?

The only people who believe ACC is a hoax are fringe tea party idiots who make up a fraction of a percent of the population. EVERYBODY else agrees. You are an dumbass.

 

[ginwilly]

Go read the IPCC's 5th report and see for yourself

Can't find specifics in there. Help?

How much difference would converting our diesel burners into natural gas make?

 

[Padawanbater2]

Can't find specifics in there. Help?

Look harder

 

[ginwilly]

Look harder

I saw projections but they weren't real clear. Are these projections based off the same models that were shown to be flawed? And by flawed I mean less accurate in their temp projections than the farmers almanac?

 

[Padawanbater2]

I saw projections but they weren't real clear. Are these projections based off the same models that were shown to be flawed? And by flawed I mean less accurate in their temp projections than the farmers almanac?

So you think all the members of 34 national science academies used wrong data, either by incompetence or with malicious intent to fool people, is that it?

 

[ginwilly]

So you think all the members of 34 national science academies used wrong data, either by incompetence or with malicious intent to fool people, is that it?

Nope not at all. To be honest I don't know why the predictions were all wrong in the high side, do you?

I think we should find out why. Do you agree or are you still disputing the innacuracies?

 

[UncleBuck]

You use opinion polls as scientific evidence??

those are scientific polls that measure opinion about scientific evidence, not opinion polls.

at least try to get one thing you say in your life right.

 

[UncleBuck]

Most scientists do not agree on anything worth noting in the global warming debate.

that's a whopper, much like the claims i have heard about termite farts and forest fires that cause global cooling.

got a citation for that?

 

[UncleBuck]

Just shortly after we are completely broke

forest fires cause global cooling guy is now positing that AGW is a 190-years-in-the-making conspiracy.

i'd ask for citation of that, but since i am not retarded i know it does not exist.

 

[UncleBuck]

Are these projections based off the same models that were shown to be flawed? And by flawed I mean less accurate in their temp projections than the farmers almanac?

gonna need a citation of that as well. i really would like to see which political front group this retarded talking point comes from.

 

[UncleBuck]

the predictions were all wrong in the high side

another claim with no citation whatsoever.

let's await citation for some of these claims. i think we will be treated to a bevvy of steaming hot shit straight from political front groups, funded by koch brothers or exxon.

but let's wait for these guys to actually back up what they say with actual studies. this promises to be hilarious.

 

[heckler73]

So heckler when should we expect your noble[sic] prize to arrive? You know for using "quantum chemistry" to look at a graph thru an upside down toilet tube while masturbating with your off hand and simultaneously disproving over a hundred years of scientific knowledge about co2 absorbative[sic] properties?

 

[Dr Kynes]

That's normally how it goes, scientists telling you you're an idiot, you plugging your ears "lalalalalalala"..

Color me shocked!

there was not a SCIENTIST in that room, you unmitigated failure.

everyone in that room was a politician a bureaucrat and/or a lawyer.

you are hilariously incompetent

 

[Dr Kynes]

E

Lying dumbass;

-66% of those aged over 65 believed that climate change is caused by human actions

-by contrast, 79% of 18-34 year olds take the view that human action is responsible for climate change

-63% of those with no post-school qualifications were unconvinced about the role of humans in producing climate change

-University graduates were much more likely to take the opposite view, with 86% agreeing that human activity was responsible - See more at:

http://www.ecopedia.com/environment/demographics-climate-change-who-believes-it-is-real/#sthash.FLLdLebm.dpuf

Not that it would matter anyway because none of you denytards accept anything unless it denies ACC too, which is why you detest science so much. It's objective, and it's objectively telling you you're all a bunch of fringe morons who can't read a pie chart. As Sanders noted, in every other facet of reality you accept science, medicine, food health/safety, engineering, etc. but when it comes to climate change, the science goes out the window and it's all a HOAX!!!

If 97% of doctors told you you had cancer, you'd get chemo, and if you wouldn't you would deserve every moment of pain you received for being a dumbass.

Stop being dumbasses.



I think you have me confused with Kynes

"ECO-pedia!!!" SERIOUSLY???

no only an opinion poll but an opinion poll sourced from a wikipedia clone dedicated exclusively to eco-tards?

easy now doc.. let it out... dont blow a gasket. give the dimwit a chance to make his case...


ohh i see, it's not even a "Pedia" its some dickhead's blog.
ill just hit the link from his Inline Citation...

http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/climate-change-in-the-american-mind/

and see whats up over there...

404. AGAIN.

seriously you mindless twat, whats with all the 404 links?
do you even check your sources before you spray this loose drippy stool all over the place or do you see the google result, and just let the dysentery flow freely?

fucking 404's every time you try to "make a point"